From: clayton stirling bartholomew (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Sat Mar 14 1998 - 13:01:14 EST
Now that I have nitpicked unnecessarily at Dale Wheeler, I realize that there
is a more troubling issue raised by the original question in this thread which
has not been addressed.
Is it ever safe to hang a major component of your theology from the nuance of
a verb form? This kind of dogmatic exegesis was quite in vogue when I was in
graduate school (mid 70's). Is it still being practiced? It always made me
nervous to see people writing exegesis papers where they were subjecting the
text to an analysis that was similar in scope to sub-atomic physics and then
drawing all manner of sweeping theological conclusions from this analysis.
I would like to wonder out loud if one really wants to support a major
doctrine on such a weak thread as verb aspect/aktionsart/tense/mood/voice. It
seems like a precarious procedure at best. I guess that I would not want to
put a lot of trust in a item of dogma that has *only* this kind of support.
-- Clayton Stirling Bartholomew Three Tree Point P.O. Box 255 Seahurst WA 98062
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:39:14 EDT